The existing tunnels are repairable, but to do it right needs them out of service for a significant time. Hence the pressing need for Gateway. Two new and eventually four tunnels is much better than none while the existing tunnels are shut down as a safety hazard.

gokeefe wrote:Yes, I think it will happen. And that's without passing anything around (not my style anyways ).You have to look at outcomes and not rhetoric.New Moynihan Station? Paid for and in progress.Gateway Tunnels? Box done, more work underway, money in the federal budget.Portal Bridge? Funded.Sandy Rehab? Funded and complete.Penn Station Trackwork? Funded multiple phases complete.Sure ARC got crushed but then "magically" something else came along.The list goes on but it's there. Sure Amtrak isn't getting the major NEC programs funded in the way they wan. It isn't "clean" but it's there and the work continues. I'm sure there are projects elsewhere that might be having their funding cut to pay for Gateway. I don't know what they are but I doubt they would be considered more important.

With all due respect, I do not know what world you live in. Certainly not the same one as me.Moynihan Station? Funded, sure, but it is a new mall over some of the tracks with no new capacity and located further from the Midtown than the existing station. Gateway Tunnels? Box is only a bit more than halfway done (10th to 11th Avenues plus section under 11th Avenue). Section between 11th and 12th Avenues is not even started. Section beneath 10th Avenue is also missing, so the existing tunnel box is just an empty basement now -- they cannot even park trains in there during the midday lul. Gateway FEIS is nowhere close to being published, likely will come out second quarter of 2019 more than 1 year after it was submitted. I have no idea where you saw money for this in the federal budget.Portal Bridge? NJ provided about $600M. At the end of January 2019, the FTA will deny the funding application for the bridge due to the lack of the 10% capacity increase. Anyone who thinks that NJ will find the rest of the $800M to fund the bridge by itself needs to familiarize themselves with NJ's unfunded pensions.Sandy Rehab? Penn got some rehab, but the existing tunnels have only gotten patchwork. Penn Station Trackwork? Funded, sure but Amtrak took the money away from other projects, so it is hard to see this as an unconditional win.Let ARC be put to rest, but Penn South is a pie in the sky and there will be no space for more trains into NYC for the next 40 years. You and I will not see more trains coming into New York during our lifetime.

ALBANY - Gov. Andrew Cuomo said his lunch meeting Wednesday with President Donald Trump was "all positive," though the Republican president did not pledge any particular amount of funding to build a new rail tunnel across the Hudson River.

Cuomo, a Democrat, traveled to the White House to discuss the estimated $13 billion Gateway tunnel project with Trump, whose administration has so far declined to recognize an Obama-era agreement to cover half the cost.

At a briefing in Manhattan following the meeting, Cuomo said he and Trump discussed the decrepit conditions inside the current, 108-year-old Hudson River tunnel connecting New York City and New Jersey, which was severely damaged by salt water that filled it during Superstorm Sandy in 2012.

Cuomo said Trump seemed to understand the need for a new tunnel but expressed concern about turning the project into a "government boondoggle."

They discussed the process New York used to build a $4 billion replacement for the Tappan Zee Bridge across the Hudson River, in which consortiums of private-sector contractors bid to design and build the new span.

"I worked with Amtrak,” Mr. Cuomo said. “To be charitable, I don’t believe Amtrak is the best vehicle to manage this project" and "This is me as much as the president: I’m not going to sign a check until I know what the amount of the check is, and I’m not going to do it based on an Amtrak estimate."

"I worked with Amtrak,” Mr. Cuomo said. “To be charitable, I don’t believe Amtrak is the best vehicle to manage this project" and "This is me as much as the president: I’m not going to sign a check until I know what the amount of the check is, and I’m not going to do it based on an Amtrak estimate."

Oh yeah because New York State has such a great track record of managing transportation projects - ESA, Second Ave Subway ...

Avatar Photo - P&W local from Gardner to Worcester at Morgan Rd., Hubbardston

Gilbert B Norman wrote:One must wonder if there will be a "Toll" to use the tunnels whenever they are built. Coming to mind is the one-time "bridge toll" charged by the New York Connecting RR to use Hell Gate Bridge. The interline NH-PRR rate was higher than the sum of the two NH and PRR Local rates. Interline tickets were endorsed "via HGB" to show the "Toll" was paid.

Yes, that's exactly New Jersey's plan:...letter from NJ Transit to the federal Department of Transportation outlines the plan, under which city rail commuters would pay a 90 cent per-trip surcharge to fund the tunnel project starting in 2020. The surcharge would jump to $1.70 in 2028, and to $2.20 in 2038.

If Amtrak were "private enough" to obligate / bond its future fare premiums--say, a $10 or even $20 per trip "Tunnel Facility Charge"-- that'd go a long way to bonding/funding its share of the project, particularly from the fare premiums it will get from market power as half-hourly WAS-NYP Acelas drive the airline market share even lower. We build shiny terminals with PFCs, why not a tunnel with TFCs?

BART changes a surcharge on all trips via the Transbay Tube, so one example in current use. H&M once had separate interstate and intrastate fares for trips via the tubes. And Newark Airport Rail Station has a PANYNJ surcharge on all fares: tickets must be encoded with "EWR" for entry or exit.

Since my friend continues to chain smoke nonstop, she is probably an Alco.

I don't think the "Acela Crowd" could care less if their ticket was surcharged for use of a new tunnel; they could care a lot if one tunnel "springs a leak" and 30m is built into the schedule account a one way tunnel. I don't think even the "Regional Crowd" would be all that concerned; those so affected are already paying their "tithe unto Abe" using "Mega-Bolt".

gokeefe wrote:Completely agreed. A surcharge for all passengers using the tunnels would be highly appropriate and permit Federal loan guarantees and/or private bonding.

Sounds reasonable! Let us do some math....(FY 2017 as posted by Wiki)Yearly NJT ridership for NYC Pennsylvania Station = 27,296,100Yearly Amtrak ridership for NYC Pennsylvania Station = 10,397,729Assuming all Amtrak riders use the tunnels under the Hudson River (which Is not true) -Total riders using these tunnels are 37,693,829.In 30 years that would add up to a total of 1,130,815,000, for simplicity let us round that up to 1.131 Billion.Depending upon how much the new tunnels would cost, and assuming the surcharge would pay the costs to build the new tunnel in 30 years, each rider would have to pay the following surcharge;$10 Billion / 1.131 = $8.84$15 Billion / 1.131 = $13.26$20 Billion / 1.131 = $17.68$25 Billion / 1.131 = $22.10That’s before taking into account for an increase in ridership year after year,.But I believe it is okay to assume ridership through the tunnels would not double. I doubt Pennsylvania Station could handle a doubling of ridership without expansion, another cost to calculate a surcharge for.

I do not think NJT could charge a $13 surcharge each way ($26 a day) in addition to regular fares.

I also wish to add how important it is for construction projects to finish on time and on budget.

How about rail riders get a $5 surcharge and all road users into the Boroughs get a $1 surcharge for NEC tunnels, under PANYNJ’s authority? I’d personally exclude PATH and ferry riders, as government-preferred alternatives.